Monday, January 13, 2014

The possessive difference

Back in his earlier work Roissy had an interesting post about the
behavioral manifestations displayed between Alpha men and Beta men.
Really he likened the behaviors to more animalistic tendencies, but
whether or not you acknowledge similar behaviors in people, the
reasoning behind these actions make a lot of sense. Alpha men are slow
to respond to sudden stimuli (such as loud noises or boisterous taunts)
because they are so unused to any significant challenge – in other
words, they’re not jumpy Betas used to opting for flight instead of
fight. Their posture and body language convey confidence, but only
because this Alpha posture is behaviorally associated with what Alphas
do.

This is an important dynamic to understand when we consider
possessiveness. A man with an Alpha disposition would be less
possessive, and therefore display an indifference to possessing
any particular woman due to his condition of (relative) sexual
abundance. Possessiveness, or certainly an overly pronounced
manifestation of possessiveness is the behavior of a Beta unused to
sexual abundance and more likely accustomed sexual rejection.

It’s important to bear in mind that possessiveness is conveyed in a
set of behaviors, attitudes and beliefs communicated in many ways. It’s
not that possessiveness necessarily makes a man unattractive to a woman;
on the contrary, it’s almost a universal female fantasy to be possessed
by a so deserving and desirably dominant Alpha Man. It’s a visceral
endorsement of the status of a woman’s superior desirability among her
peers to be the object of such an Alpha Man’s possession; but likewise
this is so common a (romance novel) feminine fantasy because of Alpha
Men’s general indifference to possessiveness that makes it so tempting
for women.

When self-deprecating, undeserving Beta men overtly display
possessiveness, women read the behavior for what it is. Beta
possessiveness is almost universally a death sentence (often literally)
for an LTR. Nothing demonstrates lower value and confirms a lack of
hypergamous suitability for a woman than a Beta preoccupied to the brink
of obsession with controlling her behaviors. This isn’t to discount the
very real reasons an Alpha or a Beta might have concern for a woman’s
behaviors, it’s that his own possessiveness conveys a lack of confidence
in himself.

I've never seen any point in acting possessive. Now, it's one thing to investigate appropriately when a woman is acting squirrely, in a suspicious manner that indicates that she may have been up to something that she shouldn't. That is right and necessary action preparatory to a nexting; for example, when I was single I cut all contact with different women for things as minor as cancelling plans, inviting strange men to a party she was hosting, or simply taking a phone call from a male "friend" late at night.

I never bothered explaining myself to them. Was I insecure or jealous? Not at all. There were a plethora of women to whom I was attracted at the time and my reasoning was that if a woman couldn't decide between me and another guy, well, he was welcome to her. I'd rather spend my time with women who had a distinct preference for me.

Now, this is not an appropriate attitude for a married man, or rather, it is a too-extreme attitude. But, as Rollo properly observes, possessiveness is merely the opposite of the abundance mentality. It is an indication that you believe that you do not merit your current wife or girlfriend. And, as those who understand Game will recognize, this is not the path to a successful long-term relationship, much less a marriage.

I trust my wife. I certainly don't want her to blow up our life together. But the fact is that if she wants to, there isn't a damn thing I can do about it. And the converse is true as well. She can't do anything about my actions either. I'm not revealing any intimate secrets here, as this is true of every single marriage and romantic relationship on the planet. Human beings have ZERO control over the actions of another human being. Marriage is all about voluntarily coming together and mutually deciding to stay together. Every single day. It is a commitment, but it is also a daily choice.

And in the event a woman fails to make that choice one day, the consolation prizes aren't so bad. As one of my friends discovered, while being frivorced out of the blue was initially devastating, spending his subsequent evenings in the company of various young women who are barely out of college was hardly the equivalent of a circle of Hell. Is it the life he chose? No. Is it the life he wanted? Not at all. But it's the life his ex-wife chose for him and he's having rather a good time making the best of it.

That's the abundance mentality. That's the "life is beautiful" mentality. That is the ALPHA mentality. As philosophers from Sextus Empiricus to Roosh will tell you, don't shed a single tear.

13 comments:

I think BETA guys often get this wrong because they think, "A dominant man sees what he wants and goes after it. I want that woman, therefore I should go after her with gusto, and she will find that attractive." That might be true in theory; but the problem is that he's not allowed to go after her in a caveman way (assuming he had that capability in the first place), so he does it with gifts and supplication, which turn her off. While an ALPHA might see an attractive woman and come on strong, he wouldn't supplicate.

Take Han Solo: he kept pursuing Leia (of course, she was the only girl in the series), but always with a "Come on, I know you want me, just admit it" attitude, never begging for her affection. (In the first two movies, at least; he gets pretty soft in the third one.) It's pretty hard to convey that kind of attitude when you have a scarcity mentality, because you're too afraid of scaring her away to be that aggressive.

OTI have a new post on the nature of free will, the Marxist view on free will and the larger implications to society. I would really appreciate it if readers from this site would give me your feedback on my post. As Marxist culture continues to progress, I believe that defending free will and agency would become necessary.

yup, you can obey Sextus Empiricus (am I cool using that name, or WHAT?!) and Roosh, or obey Scripture and neither have (nor encourage) sex outside of marriage . . . instead of tantalizing men with thoughts of endless pump and dumps with females "barely out of college"

but then, obedience would be a death knell to the vast vain ramblings of the GameBoys now, wouldnt it? LOL

That gets back to the OP. A man today can not do that unless he wants to risk prison time. If the mutts are sniffing around, and his wife ignores them or tells her husband they are bothering her, he can defend her. If she is consenting to their behavior, she is about to run off with them anyway and them we are back where we started.

Now, it's one thing to investigate appropriately when a woman is acting squarely,

How can you tell? Hamsters and Squirrels are both rodents.

There is a reason hysteria and hysterectomy have the same root.

Testosterone poisoning will cause harm. Estrogen poisoning is a WMD that will destroy civilization.

(There was a John Cleese as Sherlock Holmes grandson that featured a female granddaughter Moriarity - "why are you going to destroy civilization as we know it?" "runs in the family"; game explains the irony).

The abundance mentality has gotten me through a lot of downturns, not with females (since I'm married and not looking) but with jobs, volunteering, networking, and my side business. My experience as a beta has been one of constantly trying to overcome the dark attitude that clouds my mind and keeps me from trying to succeed. Abundance, i.e. "life is beautiful" is a really effective way to bypass the negativity.

Because the Greeks were fundamental misogynists who thought that women were all right for making babies, but that the only way a man could have a relationship with a mental and erotic equal was to f*ck some teenage boy?